Related

Comments

Success breed success. Players want to play at successful clubs. Players at successful clubs stay for less money than their market rate.
Gold Coast didn’t get quite the same deal as GWS, but they were still given generous concessions. They squandered it on a flawed strategy and Gazza. GWS and Sheeds played the long game – recruiting solid citizens as experienced mentors – not paying $$$$’s for stars.
The AFL is socialist enough with salary cap; draft etc. There is a fine line between giving all clubs a chance and protecting basket cases from their own bad decisions. The AFL gets the balance better than any international sporting code I can think of.
I suspect the Hawks can take a chance on his chronic knees because he wants to go there, so they are paying under what others may have offered for his talent.

The equalisation policy is a farce and free agency in clearly in place when a bloke who has given the club 1 year of service can just up and leave. I hope the Suns throw him is the draft so a bottom club can access him. Big risk anyway given he hasn’t played for two years.

Could not agree more with Peter and Tony. The equalisation policy is a joke. There should be a clause that young .player in the draft must play, and I reitterate play, at least three full seasons with the club that drafts them so that the club can get at least some benefit from the draft. This would sort the chaff from the straw amongst footballers . Particularly amongst those players who only want to play in a premiership team eg. Treloar, Lake, and Frawley readily come to mind.

There is a cycle in place now that means that poor performing clubs can make the right choices and still miss out on player after player. Free agency being chief in this imbalance. It is easy to say the good clubs …success builds success (it is true) but in the end the AFL’s preferred option is to see teams at the foot of the ladder having a better chance of getting better players coming through. Well done to teams like the Hawks but they get the players and will never have to worry about rebuilding because they can get the key spine player, eg Lake, Frawley or the key midfielder, I’m betting they get O’Meara, because of where they are now. It doesn’t happen if they are losing twice as many as they are winning, no matter how well they are run. It is a vicious cycle and not one that benefits an even competition, the stated position of the AFL.

I have a somewhat different perspective. I think it says as much about Hawthorn feeling warranted in taking a risk on a player that has not played football in two years whereas other clubs are not in a position to do so. It does say a bit about football in Queensland though and the inherent go home / centre of the empire advantage that (certain) Victorian clubs have. Fremantle had three players that started at other clubs play a game for them in 2016. Carlton had 15.

Tony Robb – this has nothing to do with free agency. He’s out of contract, not a free agent.

O’Meara’s move looks a lot similar to Burgoyne’s at the end of 2009. Most people thought Burgoyne’s best footy was behind him with a degenerative knee condition, yet he’s gone onto play 150+ games at Hawthorn.

This is a luxury acquisition for a club which can afford to take the risk on him. With a number of players set to retire in coming years, it’s a terrific fit for player and club if he can get on the park.

Jeremy , If a player can call the shots on were they go then it’s free agency for mine. If he gets to Hawthorn then it’s free agency. He might not get there yet but It might not rain today either. Hawthorn have been brilliant in their list management so I’m not blaming them.

Dave, the majority of Carlton’s recruits were not getting games at a senior level and were delisted or happily traded by their former clubs. I feel the Suns are less than happy about the situation given how much rehab and money they have put into this kid. For whose benefit? The reigning premiers .

Go home factor – If you don’t want to leave home don’t put your name in the draft of a national competition.

The AFL need to address the bottoming out of clubs after GWS and Suns draft concession. They have clearly failed. I just don’t believe that a team that has won the past three flags can have four first round draft picks this year but through trading secondary players they managed to do it.

They can have him GC might get a few good players and some more draft picks which they need in exchange, a better result than a “potential” star that keeps breaking down.

It makes a mockery of the system and when does Fitzpatrick chuck the wobbly with Hawthorn like he did when Sydney recruited Buddy. Yes I know he said it was over COLA and the Swans hoodwinking him but really it was about not getting his way with Buddy going to GWS.

Hawthorn continually attract the top players because they have success and a strong club culture, its not always the money.

The one hawthorn potential signing that bothers me is Tom Mitchell, Why Hawthorn? His disposal is awful and they pride themselves on the delivery, also he wins the contested ball, hawks system wouldn’t know what to do if they get contested ball.

It’s not the equalisation policy that’s the joke Citrus. It’s the AFL board that should be in Gals & Gags. The leaked documents that show they’re trying to invent a version of Our Great Game that fits into a soccer pitch should be enough proof. Why, heaven knows what’s possible from Hologram Man & the Gnomes Deep in The Bowels of Jellymont House? Maybe a version of democracy that fits Kim Il-sung’s vision of the People’s Republic.

Why do players gravitate to Dingley Dell? It’s the stable administration stupid. You paying attention up the back there Tony & Malcolm?

And I think you might be right about the car Dips. From memory, Sir Frank Downright drives an old Jeager. He only gets it out on rare occasions, like an Essendon win.

At first look it seems a bit like a cop out – young bloke who was dubbed as next G.Ablett packs up and moves from struggling club to a successful and large market club like Hawthorn.
Very similar to Kevin Durant’s move from Oklahoma to Golden State in the NBA. Superstar basketballer moving to a team that had just broke the record for most wins in a season.
Not too sure if I’m angry about this or not.

1) Clubs outside Melbourne will never be able to compete on grounds of building a superstar. Despite O’Meara being from WA, this is not a “go-home” factor decision, this is a “become a superstar” decision. You can still be a top footy player outside Victoria, but you’re not going to get regular gigs on TV or play in front of massive crowds regularly if you’re not Melbourne based.

2) As others have said above, the incentive to move is not going to be solely governed by the money on offer. The salary cap is a blunt instrument in equalization. For example, last year Treloar was supposedly offered more by Richmond but he chose Collingwood because of the “better list”. Buckley as a coach was certainly a factor in his decision. Both offers were more than what GWS offered – yet most of his colleagues (Cameron excepted) offered the same or less decided to stay because they wanted to succeed with their mates.

3) Clubs in rebuilds will not attract a player from a club also rebuilding or moving out of the rebuilding phase. There’s no incentive for O’Meara to go to a struggling club. This makes it doubly hard for clubs in rebuilds to pick up good players. If you’re not getting a game in the seniors, you’ll go anywhere. If it’s only injury keeping you out of the seniors, you’re going to go to a “better” club.

4) GWS has had much better player retention than Gold Coast from their youngsters. Much better.

Facebook and Twitter

Want to know when new stories are posted?

Enter your email address to subscribe and receive notifications of new posts by email. Note: this is not our eNewsletter sign up. Use the form on the other side to subscribe to our email eNewsletter as well!